memory_alphafandomcom-20200223-history
User talk:Throwback/archive
Welcome to Memory Alpha, Throwback! I've noticed that you've already made some contributions to our database – thanks for your edit to the Gilliam page! We all hope that you'll enjoy our activities here and decide to join our community. If you'd like to learn more about working with the nuts and bolts of Memory Alpha, I have a few links that you might want to check out: * Our policies and guidelines provides links to inform you on what is appropriate for Memory Alpha and what is not. Particular items of note are the canon policy, the editing guidelines, our point of view, copyrights and guidelines for proper etiquette. * includes a basic tutorial about how to use our special wikitext code here on Memory Alpha. * Naming conventions provides guidelines on how to name a new page that you may want to create. * The Manual of Style is an overview of the basic guidelines for how to format and style your articles. * is a list of suggestions that can help you put together an article that might end up on our Featured Articles list someday. * See the user projects page for current projects of our archivists, or help us to reduce the number of stubs. * Look up past changes you have made in your log. * Keep track of your favorite Memory Alpha articles through your very own . * Create your own user page and be contacted on this page, your . One other suggestion: if you're going to make comments on talk pages or make other sorts of comments, please be sure to sign them with four tildes (~~~~) to paste in your user name and the date/time of the comment. If you have any questions, please feel free to post them in our Ten Forward community page. Thanks, and once again, welcome to Memory Alpha! -- Cleanse (Talk) 06:36, 13 October 2009 :The above named user is the most currently available administrator to contribute to Memory Alpha; their signature was automatically added by User:Wikia. If you have any immediate questions or concerns, you may contact that user through their talk page. Blu-ray Tell me, how can you be citing the blu-ray copy as a reference for your contributions when it is not due to be released until November 16 or 17?--31dot 11:04, October 13, 2009 (UTC) :Images have been released online. See http://reboot.trekcaps.net/. – Throwback 11:06, October 13, 2009 (UTC) And where did they get them? Given the volume that they possess I'm forced to wonder if they have some sort of illegal copy.--31dot 11:26, October 13, 2009 (UTC) ::So long as none of the images are uploaded to this site, I don't see a problem with using the pics there to add information to MA. Whether or not the images on that site are illegal, they are still high-quality pics from the film so there's no reason why we can't use them. If it was in the movie, it's fair game, it doesn't matter where or when the details were uncovered. --From Andoria with Love 11:42, October 13, 2009 (UTC) :::That's true, but we still need to make sure that the information really is from the movie, and not just some speculative extrapolation based on that information (for example, see my comment at Talk:Hangar 1). Also, if articles are changed based on some screenshot, it would be nice to at least link to that screenshot from the article's talk page, so that others can check its validity without having to go through 5000+ images. -- Cid Highwind 11:49, October 13, 2009 (UTC) ::::Really, I think we should just be patient and wait until we can post the screenshots here. We're talking another month. — Morder (talk) 12:54, October 13, 2009 (UTC) Closed Caps Please keep in mind that the closed captioning is an extremely unreliable source of information, as it is often based on very early scripts or otherwise subjected to changes from the final film. It would be nice if your new information had other sources besides the CC.--31dot 02:37, November 7, 2009 (UTC) Article names Please name articles as per the naming conventions already chosen. For example, your "Armstrong-type" should have been located at "Armstrong type". You should also use the template to link to them. -- sulfur 00:37, December 18, 2009 (UTC) Auction You cited most of your recent changes as being derived from evidence seen at "Propworx auctions". Do you have any links to a website by them, pictures, catalog, or other evidence of this?--31dot 10:55, May 24, 2010 (UTC) Also keep in mind that even if these things exist, they need to have been seen in the episode somewhere, even briefly, to be considered canon. If they were only used on the set and not seen, they would be considered unreferenced material and could only be included as background information.(as you did with Molly Brown)--31dot 11:00, May 24, 2010 (UTC) Recent work It would be helpful if you could either upload the images you are drawing this information from or provide the links to them. I would tread carefully, as we have been down this road before. 31dot 01:17, September 30, 2010 (UTC) :I am drawing this information from a series of screencaps seen on TrekCore for the fourth movie. The images are of a MUNI map used by Spock when he attempted to locate the humpback whales. Images: (1.)Image 1 ** Daly City ** Millbrae ** San Bruno ** Alameda (Alameda N.A.S.) ** Oakland (Oakland Army Base/Oakland Supply Depot) ** Piedmont ** Berkeley ** Albany ** Kensington ** El Cerrito ** Richmond (2.) Image 2 ** Sausalito ** Tiburon ** Angel Island (3.) Image 3 ** East Richmond ** Hillsborough ** Burlingame ** Foster City ** Belmont ** San Mateo (This map is helpful in other ways - it shows the location of Golden Gate Park and the Presidio.) I hope this helps.– Throwback 01:38, September 30, 2010 (UTC) Shuttles Please don't update a page with info that will require it be be renamed if you aren't going to move it and update the links. It's harder to fix them then it is to do all of it up front. - 17:39, April 21, 2011 (UTC) :I used to know how to move pages. Since the upgrade, I haven't been able to learn this function. How do I move pages?Throwback 17:55, April 21, 2011 (UTC) Next to the edit page button is a small tab arrow that will display the option, and what links here is located on the floating bar at the bottom of the screen. As for your recent edit, there is already a shuttlecraft 05 page, and it now needs to be merged with the new page you created. Please check to make sure there isn't already a page for something when you create a new one. - 18:11, April 21, 2011 (UTC) :I believe there are two shuttlecraft 05s - the Clarke and the Feynman. The Feynman is confirmed as this number in the Star Trek: The Next Generation Companion which used background information from the show's creators, and none of its information has been disproved. This is why on the Enterprise-D shuttle template I have three links - one to shuttlecraft 05, and two each to the Clarke and the Feynman. It's a compromise.Throwback 18:15, April 21, 2011 (UTC) Shuttle 05 was actually the Feynman, not the Clarke, which is my bad in thinking it was the Clarke. Either way, if there are two and one is unnamed, the link shouldn't be the "Shuttlecraft 05" text, but an "unnamed" link next to the other name, or maybe the year. - 18:27, April 21, 2011 (UTC) :Actually, there are two shuttles 05 - Clarke (2366) and Feynman (2367). Both are named. However, we have a page that is for Enterprise-D Shuttlecraft 05, and on the Feynman page, in the background section, the contributor writes, "The Star Trek: The Next Generation Companion identifies the shuttle used in the episode TNG: "The Nth Degree" as the Feynman." This is shuttle 05, so why this is not stated in the main body of the page is perplexing. Since the information provided is the same as in the Feynman page, maybe we should delete Enterprise-D Shuttlecraft 05's page. 19:29, April 21, 2011 (UTC) Affiliation Do not switch owner/operator calls back to affiliation. - 13:15, May 12, 2011 (UTC) Affiliation should be switched to "owner" and "operator" calls if they can be used. Please don't just add information to an affiliation call that should use the others. - 21:31, August 16, 2011 (UTC) Hello again. Can you use for instead of Federation. Thanks. - 01:06, August 17, 2011 (UTC) Mass Effect Wiki Hi. I'll be straight to the point. I've learnt you had some "issues" with the ME Wiki, or rather with its admins. So I want you to help with this. Right at this moment I'm struggling to comply with the request by the staff to give attribution to the hard work of Mr. Sparthawg and Mr. Lancer, and it would actally help if someone dropped by and said that it's not exactly entirely theirs. If you become interested in this project - an ME wiki free of Sparthawg's regime - I'll make you an admin immediately. [[User:Zulu_DFA| KITTEH POWAH!!!]] [[User_Talk:Zulu_DFA| call in teh kittehz]] 10:14, May 17, 2011 (UTC) Mister, you could have had a courtesy to reply to me as well. To clarify, this is not an "ugly power struggle", this is a feeble attempt to explore the possibility if there can be a better Mass Effect wiki, where peoply like you could make their contributions without getting blocked, once their services are not required. But, since you're uninterested, accept my apologies for the annoyance. Be well. [[User:Zulu_DFA| KITTEH POWAH!!!]] [[User_Talk:Zulu_DFA| call in teh kittehz]] 16:38, May 17, 2011 (UTC) Pages Hi there Throwback. When adding references to books such as the Ships of the Line, could you please be sure to add page numbers? This is part of an effort to make references more precise and easier to verify. For more information, see Memory Alpha: Cite your sources#Secondary sources. You should also note that book titles should be italicised. Thanks.–Cleanse ( talk | ) 00:29, August 17, 2011 (UTC) Thanks for that. It helps a lot. :-) –Cleanse ( talk | ) 01:21, August 17, 2011 (UTC) Arctic Exploration I saw that you linked to the image on the blog for this name, but can you link to the actual blog article in future? Thanks. -- sulfur 20:58, September 1, 2011 (UTC) :Yes, and you're welcome.Throwback 22:07, September 1, 2011 (UTC) Sidebars might be a better choice than for satellites and the like, as "type" makes far more sense than "class". - 03:44, September 6, 2011 (UTC) :Could you please check whether a sidebar is really sensible on an article? On Selay (planet), for example, the sidebar you added just bloats the page, because there isn't much text content to go with the height of the pretty much empty sidebar. We've deliberately not added a sidebar in these cases. -- Cid Highwind 09:28, September 9, 2011 (UTC) ::Reiterating the above, it would be appreciated if you could weigh in at Forum:Two-line sidebars before you continue adding them to short articles. 31dot (talk) 19:51, August 8, 2012 (UTC) ::Again, if all the information in the sidebar of a very short article can be found in the first line of that article, I would question the need for a sidebar. 31dot (talk) 20:57, August 9, 2012 (UTC) :::I read the forum. The first criteria was that the sidebar should not have less than 2 lines filled, unless it was accompanied by a diagram. With the latest communication, the criteria has been defined more narrowly. If a first line addresses all the salient points, then there is no need for a sidebar. I am puzzled. When I was working on ships, I would add sidebars from information on the first line. No one at the time said, "Don't do this." Now, according to this new criteria, many of the ship articles I worked on would require that their sidebars be removed. If this is so, why were sidebars created in the first place, and what purpose do they serve now? Do I have to remove the sidebars I created for the ships and the planets you missed because they are irrelevant? I lack understanding, and I don't want to make your job more harder, so I won't be working on the rest of the planet articles. If you require me to remove the sidebars from the articles I have already worked on, I will be happy to accommodate your request. Throwback (talk) 21:37, August 9, 2012 (UTC) ::Please pardon my poor titling of the forum; the point I was really trying to make was that the need for a sidebar should be evaluated based on the amount of information, whether there is a picture or not, the size of the article, and other factors like that. Sidebars are meant to provide a highlight of important, common information to glance at without reading the entire article; if the article is a few lines or less, it isn't really necessary to have a sidebar. I don't require you (nor can I) to remove anything in and of itself; nor do I require anyone to cease their activities; I only want thought to be put into this so that articles have only what they need. 31dot (talk) 23:16, August 9, 2012 (UTC) Star system articles There's a discussion going on whether star system articles are useful if the name of the star system hasn't been explicitly mentioned: Forum:Star system article by assumption. Can you stop creating new articles for the moment, while this discussion is ongoing? Thanks. -- Cid Highwind 10:50, September 8, 2011 (UTC) Alpha or Beta Quadrant Hi there! I couldn't help but noticing that recently you've edited a number of planet pages with information about which quadrant they are in, Alpha or Beta. To give two examples, there's Rigel IV and Deneb IV. I don't doubt for a second that you have valid reasons for adding that info, but could you please always clearly cite the info rather then just adding "alpha quadrant". Planet pages tend to suffer from "trekkie folk wisdom" (ie Klingon Empire planet -> must be Beta Quadrant and stuff like that). Such non-canon info is not very visible, and thus it keeps persisting. But making sure all quadrant info is clearly cited would make the work of excorsising bad info a lot easier. -- Capricorn 09:36, September 9, 2011 (UTC) Latest edits to Vulcan (planet) Please stop your inappropriate edits to Vulcan (planet); canonical information should not be treated as apocryphal or as bg info! The info from the star chart in is what showed up on screen (therefore being canonical), so that's what should be included in the main body of the article. --Defiant 12:36, September 10, 2011 (UTC) new ships Very nice work on those new ship articles, but with so much new info from what I'm imagening might (stil) be hard to read text, a screenshot of the display in question would be very useful. -- Capricorn (talk) 17:54, July 27, 2012 (UTC) Shipname templates When there are 2-3 ships? Not required. Work the names into the text if possible, or add "see also" links. Don't make a template with a little box for the ship's name. -- sulfur (talk) 03:27, August 2, 2012 (UTC) Sort keys FYI, you don't need to explicitly add a sort key if the natural sort order is ok. By natural, I mean that an article will sort by default starting with the first character of the article and moving right. Older versions of the MediaWiki software differentiated between upper and lower case letters, but I think with the last update, both sort the same now. You only need to add an explicit sort key when you want the article to sort differently than the default; for example, people's names are normally sorted lastname, firstname, so the sort key needs to be added to change from the default (firstname lastname). For ships that start with a prefix (USS, IRW, IKS, etc.) we want them to sort by the ship name, not the prefix, so the sort key shipname, prefix (or shipname, prefix (registry)) needs to be added. For ships without a prefix, the default sort is normally fine. Adding a sort key in this case doesn't hurt anything, it's just not necessary. I hope this helps. :) -- Renegade54 (talk) 15:42, August 3, 2012 (UTC) ::Thanks for the FYI.Throwback (talk) 15:52, August 3, 2012 (UTC) The date of the map You have recently added that the various planets etc appeared on the starchart "in 2364". While "Conspiracy" was the most prominent on screen appearance, the map however first appeared from in-universe pov in 2293 in Star Trek VI and the last on screen appearance was in 2370 in DS9 "Cardassians". --Pseudohuman (talk) 00:28, August 6, 2012 (UTC) minor thing Hi, just something I've noticed, but when you add the star type according to the Star Trek: Star Charts, there's usually no need to link to wikipedia; star types like G-type star or yellow dwarf have articles here too. Cheers, and keep up the good work! -- Capricorn (talk) 12:19, August 12, 2012 (UTC) :Also, when more then info from more then one timeline is featured in an article, the template to use is not but . (guidelines here). -- Capricorn (talk) 01:47, August 13, 2012 (UTC) ::Thanks for the info. :) Throwback (talk) 01:54, August 13, 2012 (UTC) No problem. I'm just hoping I'm not coming of as disapproving of the magnificent job you've been doing on all those planet articles. -- Capricorn (talk) 02:07, August 13, 2012 (UTC) ::Not at all. Throwback (talk) 02:13, August 13, 2012 (UTC) Links When adding links to pages, make sure that you're linking to what you think you are linking to. For example, a link to "USS Enterprise" links to a disambiguation page, not the starship from the original series. Using preview and opening links into a new window is a good test for this. -- sulfur (talk) 17:15, August 13, 2012 (UTC) Recent chart edits The references you are adding to Maxwell's ready room should be put before the alternate timeline mention, not after, since the article is presumed to be in the regular timeline.(as I did at Beta Reilley.) 31dot (talk) 00:11, August 24, 2012 (UTC) Link removals Please do not remove links to valid pages. Your recent series of edits to articles about planets made 22 pages orphans. -- sulfur (talk) 12:57, August 28, 2012 (UTC) StarTrek.com links When linking to pages on StarTrek.com, check out and . These are the preferred mechanisms to use, as it allows us to easily find links to that site. Thanks. -- sulfur (talk) 16:38, August 29, 2012 (UTC) A couple more items I noticed in your edits, on Memory Alpha, we have chosen to capitalize "Human". In addition, when adding external links to a page, please use the heading "External link" if there is one, and "External links" if there are multiple (note the capitalization). Thanks again -- sulfur (talk) 17:02, August 29, 2012 (UTC) Pages for deletion Before adding a lot more pages for deletion suggestions, it might be a good idea to address some of the concerns brought up and let a few suggestions be resolved before adding a great number of them. Not a hard and fast rule, just a suggestion. 31dot (talk) 10:32, September 5, 2012 (UTC) If you come across other "unsaid star system" article that should be deleted along the same lines as the ones in that discussion, I would either just comment on the talk page that they need to be deleted, or tag them for immediate deletion by typing in the article, and put the reason why in the edit summary. I don't think it's necessary to have the formal discussion on them given the previous one; and if there is disagreement from someone else, they can bring it up on the undeletion page. 31dot (talk) 01:28, September 29, 2012 (UTC) Earth Starfleet There is no "Earth Starfleet", but there is a "United Earth Starfleet", though generally there isn't a reason to point out the difference, as the year does that. If you see any lingering Earth Starfleets while editing, please either remove the Earth or change it to United Earth. Thanks. - 02:39, September 6, 2012 (UTC) :Fixed.Throwback (talk) 03:13, September 6, 2012 (UTC) Affiliation - Non-aligned Please don't add this to planets of which their interstellar affiliations or global governmental body has not been mentioned. If it is unknown we don't know if an affiliation exists or not, therefor non-aligned would be speculation in these cases. --Pseudohuman (talk) 08:50, September 12, 2012 (UTC) Category Buildings should be categorized as Establishments, not Geography. 31dot (talk) 00:42, September 17, 2012 (UTC) Regarding the screen freeze-frames I presume you are getting your info from- would it be possible for you to upload images of a few of them? I don't mean every one, but just a few so people know we aren't making this stuff up. They could go in the Dixon Hill series article. Just a thought. 31dot (talk) 03:23, September 17, 2012 (UTC) :I don't have screen freeze-frame technology, sorry. :( I am getting my information from Trekcore.org. Maybe we could ask Jorg or someone else who can do this? I can point to where I am finding this information.Throwback (talk) 03:42, September 17, 2012 (UTC) I think that what you are doing is fine for now- it's just a thought. As you say, I'm sure someone can do it at some point. No problem here. 31dot (talk) 03:50, September 17, 2012 (UTC) :As the page numbers are legible, I am adding them to the articles. I hope this helps.Throwback (talk) 03:56, September 17, 2012 (UTC) PfD pages It's unnecessary to further comment on the PfD discussions of pages that have already been deleted and archived; if you support it, no comment is necessary; if you oppose it, it should be brought up on the undeletion page. 31dot (talk) 21:01, September 23, 2012 (UTC) :The Alijon page hasn't been deleted. It's still on Memory Alpha.Throwback (talk) 21:23, September 23, 2012 (UTC) My apologies. I was going by the PfD itself and didn't realize I must have skipped over actually deleting the page back when I did that whole list. Thank you. 31dot (talk) 21:52, September 23, 2012 (UTC) 'Conspiracy' images Here you go. - [[User:Aatrek|'Aatrek']] 19:58, October 5, 2012 (UTC) File:Starbase_Trailer_Twenty-Nine.jpeg|Starbase Trailer 29 File:USS_Heart_of_Gold.jpeg|USS Heart of Gold File:USS_Minnow.jpeg|USS Minnow File:USS_Nightwing.jpeg|USS Nightwing File:USS_Omaha_Nebraska.jpeg|USS Omaha Nebraska File:USS_Sherlock_Holmes.jpeg|USS Sherlock Holmes File:USS_Unicorn.jpeg|USS Unicorn Thank you, Throwback (talk) 23:33, October 5, 2012 (UTC) Unwritten star system articles Hey. Regarding your recent work on the planets, stars and star system articles you may want to check this page and give it a clean up? I think there are several star systems on this list which have no actual reference. Tom (talk) 21:29, October 7, 2012 (UTC) :I'll get to work on it. Thanks, Throwback (talk) 21:36, October 7, 2012 (UTC) Unsaid system articles Please note that any unsaid system article does not qualify for speedy deletion, there has to be a deletion discussion first, and shouldn't be marked as such. That said, you could use one deletion discussion to cover more than one page, so as to avoid many related discussions going on at the same time on multiple pages, but we do need to follow the guideline for these. - 15:46, October 14, 2012 (UTC) :I actually suggested that he do so(as seen above at "Pages for deletion"), as we already had the discussion at Unsaid star system articles, as he was putting up PfD's faster than we could clear them out; and additionally, no one was responding to them, with a couple exceptions. 31dot (talk) 18:44, October 14, 2012 (UTC) Ah, didn't see that, though I still think it's a good idea to have a list somewhere and the rational, either in a PfD discussion or a forum post, since there should be some location, other than here, that one can point to to explain all these deletions if it comes up. :) - 00:22, October 15, 2012 (UTC) :When I initially started deleting them I put a link in the edit summary but I kinda fell out of doing it- I can resume doing so, as a start. I probably won't be able to delete any more until at least tomorrow anyway. 31dot (talk) 01:25, October 15, 2012 (UTC) located in alpha quadrant You have recently added that several stars and planets are located in the alpha quadrant without adding any reference on what that information is based on. please add a cite on these. --Pseudohuman (talk) 09:00, October 23, 2012 (UTC) :The Tholian Assembly (on the far left of the chart) and the Romulan and Klingon Empires (on the far right of the chart) were identified in dialog as Alpha Quadrant powers. So, the space between these three, must be in the Alpha Quadrant.Throwback (talk) 03:24, October 24, 2012 (UTC) If it is stated that a system or a planet is in the alpha quadrant, based on the chart, there should be a cite of the chart ( , production art) as the source of the alpha quadrant location info and a bg-note on the articles, of an example where tholian assembly and romulus are identified as located in alpha quadrant in every article, since the chart itself doesn't identify a quadrant name or border. So that readers can connect the dots too. --Pseudohuman (talk) 04:55, October 24, 2012 (UTC) :Thanks for the hint, Throwback (talk) 21:11, October 24, 2012 (UTC)